If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Kiya..."If u are to blind to see the Knicks management and headcoach did nothing to enhance, improve, or create an optimistic enviroment of the future to come for the Knick-team and Knick-Fans in the last two years.....your expectation as a knowledgable Knick-fan is slippin."

Great Post! Allow me to speak my mind.

1. What do these teams have in common: Steelers, Yankees, Knicks?They're historic franchises with an IDENTITY. From way back PIT has always been a smash mouth, hard-nosed, defensive team.

The Yanks have always been a top spending, home-run hitting team. Hence the Bronx Bomber moniker.Can you guess where I'm going with this?

The Knicks like mostly all sucessful eastern teams were a defensive minded, tough team.

The funny thing is... this is your identity. No matter what coach or managers brought in...

the identity was still the same. The (outside) perception was still the same. The Steelers have preached defense no matter the coach, and if a new one was hired- they made sure he was the "type" they've always coveted, or he didn't last long (but really its been 3 coaches for like 20 years...)

Same went for the Yanks... they draft reflected their identity as did their coaching choices. Whenever someone came in and tried to do things too different- he failed! They even went as far as to asses a prospective manager's ability to deal w/ the famous relentless media. THIS IS A REQUISITE and always has been.

Our Knicks (and most suc. east franchises) are a Defensive Identity team. Mike D'Antoni is not a defensive coach... Nash & Co. included.

Kiya..."If u are to blind to see the Knicks management and headcoach did nothing to enhance, improve, or create an optimistic enviroment of the future to come for the Knick-team and Knick-Fans in the last two years.....your expectation as a knowledgable Knick-fan is slippin."

Great Post! Allow me to speak my mind.

1. What do these teams have in common: Steelers, Yankees, Knicks?They're historic franchises with an IDENTITY. From way back PIT has always been a smash mouth, hard-nosed, defensive team.

The Yanks have always been a top spending, home-run hitting team. Hence the Bronx Bomber moniker.Can you guess where I'm going with this?

The Knicks like mostly all sucessful eastern teams were a defensive minded, tough team.

The funny thing is... this is your identity. No matter what coach or managers brought in...

the identity was still the same. The (outside) perception was still the same. The Steelers have preached defense no matter the coach, and if a new one was hired- they made sure he was the "type" they've always coveted, or he didn't last long (but really its been 3 coaches for like 20 years...)

Same went for the Yanks... they draft reflected their identity as did their coaching choices. Whenever someone came in and tried to do things too different- he failed! They even went as far as to asses a prospective manager's ability to deal w/ the famous relentless media. THIS IS A REQUISITE and always has been.

Our Knicks (and most suc. east franchises) are a Defensive Identity team. Mike D'Antoni is not a defensive coach... Nash & Co. included.

You can't argue that we as an Eastern Conf. team have always and will always demand defense as our IDENTITY

and coach will never be known for that. Some fans just don't get. I don't blame them though...

Kiya and Clyde and myself have already realized this mistake...

we're ahead of the curve.

This is all anecdotal and poppy****...want to know what the Knicks identity is right now? Losers! If that changes and it happens to be from an explosive high flying offense then that will be our identity. If it comes from lock-down defense then great! No one is anti-defense and that includes D'ant. (BTW, the 70's Knicks who won two titles may have played good defense but they were known for their unselfish play and constant ball movement something D'ant emphasizes)

Those teams you mentioned were not defined by their nick names or identity...the players played and won a specific way and EARNED that identity. The key being the PLAYERS. The Bronx Bombers could call themselves that all day but without homerun hitters it would be some random nickname without meaning.

You are not ahead of the curve...you are looking backwards whether it be the 90's Knicks or old school Yanks. You act as if you and the other pessimists coined and own the importance of defense. It's a laughable strawman argument designed to paint your opposition as some how anti-defense. It's absurd and highlights your lack of an argument. We all know the importance of defense but you seem to forget that we have a 6'9 PF playing center, no true SG and no competent PG. Yet you would have us believe all the blame is to be laid on D'ants shoulders ignoring that his departure from the Suns did not lead to a lock down Suns defense. Even with Shaq they still played mediocre D at best and now without Shaq are once again one of the worst defensive teams in the league. Since D'ant is gone and they still play lackluster defensive us rational individuals can safely conclude it's because of the players not a system.

BTW, we are all Knick fans above any one coach. If Mike D gets comptent players and we still suck then he needs to go. My argument has not changed from the minute the haters crept out of the shadows...give the guy a chance. I do not believe that D'ant's system has a fatal flaw nor is it contradictory to good defense and if you assert otherwise then you need to back it up with evidence. I maintain and will always maintain that we live and die by the players...not the coach. A coach can only maximize talent and put in place a situation where the players can win games for you. Mike D has consistently shown that he is more then competent and a quick glance at his coaching career bares that out. Multiple Coach of the Year awards, and several Euro/Italian titles prove his bonafides as a coach regardless of what some on this forum would have us think. Has he made mistakes? Sure. What coach hasn't? Is he a worse coach then Mike Brown or Doc Rivers? Certainly not!

This is all anecdotal and poppy****...want to know what the Knicks identity is right now? Losers! If that changes and it happens to be from an explosive high flying offense then that will be our identity. If it comes from lock-down defense then great! No one is anti-defense and that includes D'ant. (BTW, the 70's Knicks who won two titles may have played good defense but they were known for their unselfish play and constant ball movement something D'ant emphasizes)

Those teams you mentioned were not defined by their nick names or identity...the players played and won a specific way and EARNED that identity. The key being the PLAYERS. The Bronx Bombers could call themselves that all day but without homerun hitters it would be some random nickname without meaning.

You are not ahead of the curve...you are looking backwards whether it be the 90's Knicks or old school Yanks. You act as if you and the other pessimists coined and own the importance of defense. It's a laughable strawman argument designed to paint your opposition as some how anti-defense. It's absurd and highlights your lack of an argument. We all know the importance of defense but you seem to forget that we have a 6'9 PF playing center, no true SG and no competent PG. Yet you would have us believe all the blame is to be laid on D'ants shoulders ignoring that his departure from the Suns did not lead to a lock down Suns defense. Even with Shaq they still played mediocre D at best and now without Shaq are once again one of the worst defensive teams in the league. Since D'ant is gone and they still play lackluster defensive us rational individuals can safely conclude it's because of the players not a system.

EXCELLENT EFFING POST!!!

It's unfortunate that people like Red and Kiyaman refuse to look forward, and claim we need an enigma of an identity to be revitalized.

Trill is absolutely correct is saying a team nickname doesn't suggest the identity, the team's PLAYERS do.

"I'm ahead of the curve"

HAH if anything, you're behind about 30 years buddy. Looking to past teams and saying we are REQUIRED to maintain that identity to be good moving forward is blasphemy.

We tore down our team for a reason. We hired new personel, and are about to get a completely new roster of players. If it isn't obvious enough already, WE ARE TRYING TO CREATE A NEW IDENTITY and put NYC back on the map in the world of basketball.

Trillion, I liked reading your posts. The pessimism I keep reading from Knicks fans is sickening. (HI Still a Fan I know your on here) Quick all together now let's all complain about Mike D'antoni. Boo Hoo. Bring back Van Gundy. Some people are never satisfied and complain like old ladies.

@ Trill

This is all anecdotal and poppy****...want to know what the Knicks identity is right now? Losers!

No, I don't want to know what the Knick identity is now... If I did I would of asked.

If that changes and it happens to be from an explosive high flying offense then that will be our identity. If it comes from lock-down defense then great!

I.e... You support coach. Read carefully... As a confident adult, I can understand it... But you keep repeating and defending your position... And subsequently think you're smart enough to call me out as you do what you accuse me of. Your love for me has clouded your judgement and your complex is permiating through your writing. You're not quite there yet... A for effort... Anyway

No one is anti-defense and that includes D'ant. (BTW, the 70's Knicks who won two titles may have played good defense but they were known for their unselfish play and constant ball movement something D'ant emphasizes)

Hummm... Did I say you were anti-defense? B/c you seem to feel you can speak for everyone. Again, being short isn't personal. Your complex and subsequent rants on your soap-box indicate your threatened position and screams insecurity. Coupled w/ your propensity to argue (using childish tech's which I exposed) is indicative of your inferior introspect. Its all right Trill. Back to your hogwash...

Those teams you mentioned were not defined by their nick names or identity...the players played and won a specific way and EARNED that identity. The key being the PLAYERS. The Bronx Bombers could call themselves that all day but without homerun hitters it would be some random nickname without meaning.

Cont'd

Wow, I thought I taught you how to understand contextualizing. I'll rephrase to assist your anger driven, limited mind-set. Those teams drafted and built based on their identity NOT nickname. Have you noticed in your infinite wisdom the Knicks drafting/building w/ an identity influenced by D'Antoni? Breathe were getting closer.

Next...a history lesson on the 1970's NYK's? Do I have to point out your over expressed afinity for a 30yr old team? One which you should have been too young to enjoy.... Or your over emphasis to be such a supporter? I guess b/c you can spew glossy views of our historic franchise you have credence? Nope. Again, feeling the need to defend your position in such a condecending way indicates insecurity. I'll let you figure out why. See what anger does to you. Those teams were built/influenced by what their identity was. They played & were coached and won/loss, but adhered to an identity. East teams historically have defenses,West mostly scoring. No matter the coach or manager, their identity remains. Ours was defense... D'Antoni's isn't. Save your arguable drival- you can never convince me or any knowledgeable person otherwise. Let me guess... That word knowledgeable is getting to you. That complex again.
The Yankees didn't just call themselves that b/c it was cool. Do your homework. You think the Steel

No, I don't want to know what the Knick identity is now... If I did I would of asked.

I.e... You support coach. Read carefully... As a confident adult, I can understand it... But you keep repeating and defending your position... And subsequently think you're smart enough to call me out as you do what you accuse me of. Your love for me has clouded your judgement and your complex is permiating through your writing. You're not quite there yet... A for effort... Anyway

Hummm... Did I say you were anti-

This was a nice attempt at being witty but it crashed and burned like your "logic" on the Knicks. You did not address a single point I made nor did you type anything remotely funny.

Sorry to burst your bubble but out of all the forum members I have ever encountered on any website you would be at the very bottom of posters I would consider "love" for. I don't even hate or dislike you...the accurate word would be pity. Pity that you are so poor at writing. Pity that you can't grasp simple basketball logic. Pity that simple points made in your direction fall on deaf ignorant ears. You are the KO.com equivlent of an Ethiopian child with a destended stomach and fly on your lip...you need a charity built for your cause.

For the record, I don't do anything close to what you do. I don't lurch from thread to thread repeating the same discredited talking points over and over. I don't hijack threads and change the subject just to further my pessimistic rants. No sir, that distinction falls on you and the rest of the crybaby chorus of emotional d-bags. The only thing I am guilty of is trying to make you understand logic in the hopes I don't have to read your same tired drivel for the umpteenth time.

Hummm... Did I say you were anti-defense? B/c you seem to feel you can speak for everyone. Again, being short isn't personal. Your complex and subsequent rants on your soap-box indicate your threatened position and screams insecurity. Coupled w/ your propensity to argue (using childish tech's which I exposed) is indicative of your inferior introspect. Its all right Trill. Back to your hogwash...

Wow you finally discovered the "paragraph"! Good for you guy! And such big words! Dictionary.com must be grateful for your attempts at sounding educated. Now only if there were a website where you could look up information on how to get a clue...

Curtain wasn't part of their plan? That PIT all of a sudden learned defense? Nope. More wikipedia for you.

You are not ahead of the curve...you are looking backwards whether it be the 90's Knicks or old school Yanks. You act as if you and the other pessimists coined and own the importance of defense. It's a laughable strawman argment designed to paint your opposition as some how anti-defense.

Again, while flatering, your response is alarming. Add sensativity to your bowl of inferior self worth trail mix. I act as if I coined the term etc... Paint my opposition... Nice try but allow me to interject... When I wrote; you (or anyone you consider my opposition) were about as far away from my mind as the morning sh*t I took last Monday. Face it, you're insignificant and have been since Metro's sodemization. But good effort in trying to salvage your rep. It starts with your affinity and subsequent mimic of styles- then after reading my posts you added your fake intellectual flavor- don't think I didn't notice.... Problem is when you're not as intelligent as you try to come off, you lose credibility from those who know better. Again, A for effort. Thumbs up big boy!

It's absurd and highlights your lack of an argument. We all know the importance of defense but you seem to forget that we have a 6'9 PF playing center, no true SG and no competent PG.

Wow, I thought I taught you how to understand contextualizing. I'll rephrase to assist your anger driven, limited mind-set. Those teams drafted and built based on their identity NOT nickname. Have you noticed in your infinite wisdom the Knicks drafting/building w/ an identity influenced by D'Antoni? Breathe were getting closer.

Next...a history lesson on the 1970's NYK's? Do I have to point out your over expressed afinity for a 30yr old team? One which you should have been too young to enjoy.... Or your over emphasis to be such a supporter? I guess b/c you can spew glossy views of our historic franchise you have credence? Nope. Again, feeling the need to defend your position in such a condecending way indicates insecurity. I'll let you figure out why. See what anger does to you. Those teams were built/influenced by what their identity was. They played & were coached and won/loss, but adhered to an identity. East teams historically have defenses,West mostly scoring. No matter the coach or manager, their identity remains. Ours was defense... D'Antoni's isn't. Save your arguable drival- you can never convince me or any knowledgeable person otherwise. Let me guess... That word knowledgeable is getting to you. That complex again.
The Yankees didn't just call themselves that b/c it was cool. Do your homework. You think the Steel

Your silly point about identity was soundly rebuked and discredited and now you want to change the subject...I don't blame you. Oh the emotional rants of a depressed child...you say I have a complex yet you call me out in every other thread including directing an entire thread towards me. oops! Thought that your dedication thread which I thoroughly romped you in and sent you running would be so quickly forgotten...huh? Me thinks you are projecting more than a Sony IMAX theater. Go ahead dude...create ANOTHER thread in my honor and I will be glad to embarrass you once again.

Lets also examine how you completely contradict yourself...shall we? I stated that a team and identity is defined by the players and used your example of the Bronx Bombers as proof that you need homerun hitters to "own that identity". You wrote AFTER my irrefutable logic:

Exactly, w/o defensive players we won't be a defensive team.

Conceding the point and completely discrediting your initial post. After writing and admiting your failures you then revert back once again:

They played & were coached and won/loss, but adhered to an identity. East teams historically have defenses,West mostly scoring. No matter the coach or manager, their identity remains. Ours was defense

So which is it nimrod? Is it the players who define a teams identity or their conference or history? Does a team keep the same identity regardless of players, coaches and era's or does that change with the times?

You're too easy and a scrub barely worth my time. You rant about my "over emphasis" and "support" as if I was gushing about the 70's team. I merly corrected the record. Sorry if you don't understand or know the history of the team you claim to be a fan of. I make no apologies for having gone back and learned about the greatest Knick team ever assembled. You might want to do the same lest you further your ignorance about a subject you furiously type about...

(there's that argument word again... So combative aren't we?) Here's an astute observation... I mention historic identity & I'm crucified and called living in the past.

You continually mention PHX w/ D'Antoni and you thought I would let that slip? +1 for you thinking you were special. +2 for putting words in mouths.

Yet you would have us believe all the blame is to be laid on D'ants shoulders ignoring that his departure from the Suns did not lead to a lock down Suns defense. Even with Shaq they still played mediocre D at best and now without Shaq are once again one of the worst defensive teams in the league. Since D'ant is gone and they still play lackluster defensive us rational individuals can safely conclude it's because of the players not a system.

I put all the blame on D'Ant... That's a limited crux used to over-generalize and de-contextualize my and others stance. Such broad and sweeping assertions... I guess I could now say you feel D'Antoni is the end all be all best coach ever.
But with the .001% of my mind I dedicate to you (feel better?) I understand w/o generalizing. Re-read and maybe you'll catch on. BTW... Since D'Antoni has gone... PHX still made the playoffs. Go Figure.

(there's that argument word again... So combative aren't we?) Here's an astute observation... I mention historic identity & I'm crucified and called living in the past.

You continually mention PHX w/ D'Antoni and you thought I would let that slip? +1 for you thinking you were special. +2 for putting words in mouths.

You are obsessed with me huh? Why can't this remain on the merits of topic...why must you try to make this about me? I already discredited everything you have to say and will be happy to shred you like a head of cabbage.

I mention the Suns because that was the last team our current head Coach coached. Further they have a very similar core and have the same high scoring lack of D "identity". You are using D'ant's HISTORY to assert he is incapable of teaching defense. I astutely show that the Suns even under a different coach retain the similar if not same exact identity. You want to somehow turn that into a "gotcha" moment as if I am contradicting myself but it fails miserably. Instead of debating basketball you want to try and make me seem disingenuous...that irony does not go unnoticed.

Trillion, I liked reading your posts. The pessimism I keep reading from Knicks fans is sickening. (HI Still a Fan I know your on here) Quick all together now let's all complain about Mike D'antoni. Boo Hoo. Bring back Van Gundy. Some people are never satisfied and complain like old ladies.

You are obsessed with me huh? Why can't this remain on the merits of topic...why must you try to make this about me?

Because you seem to need my attention. Now you got it. Below will be (what I suspect will continue) your misrepresentation and moronic contradictions as you attempt to argue but really document my point. So sad...

I already discredited everything you have to say and will be happy to shred you like a head of cabbage.

I mention the Suns because that was the last team our current head Coach coached. Further they have a very similar core and have the same high scoring lack of D "identity". You are using D'ant's HISTORY to assert he is incapable of teaching defense. I astutely show that the Suns even under a different coach retain the similar if not same exact identity.

See I told you, can't help but embarras yourself can you? Nash & Amare are similar to our core? Damn your credibility is almost in the negative. For once you're correct with one thing, and simultaneously agree with what I said. Very good son. Let's continue... here's where you need a breath b/c a point will be made using YOUR WORDS.

See this: "I astutely show that the Suns even under a different coach retain the similar if not same exact identity"? That was my point that you argued but yet reiterated. That's not a gotcha moment...
it's a stop wasting everyones time Trill moment. Your propensity for arguing is femanine and annoying.

...as if I am contradicting myself but it fails miserably. Instead of debating basketball you want to try and make me seem disingenuous...that irony does not go unnoticed.

I would say you seem frustrated, foolish and biased towards your great white hypes (D'ant,Gal,Lee). But hey it all leads to the same conclusion right?